HB 444 Civil Unions

[David M]

So here's a thought from an idle mind... Instead of redefining marriage, maybe a new word? Eliminate the issue of the word "marriage".
Marriage (marry, married, etc) for the opposite gender pairing = Garriage (garry, garried, etc) for same gender pairing.
Same rights, kinda like using male/female, equal but more defining.

OK, back under my rock

David

Ninole Resident

[PaulW]

Why not just treat people as individuals?

[Blakeyboy1]

I don't know... I'd settle for garriage

-Blake
http://www.theboysgreatescape.blogspot.com/

[Laughing_girl]

Now that the civil unions issue were defeated in the State Legislature this year, we can start reviewing women's right to vote (Aug 1920 - less than 89 years ago).

"All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing." (in my world change that to good people)
-Edmund Burke

John, and all the other supporters of civil unions - we made a mistake, a very BIG MISTAKE.

We thought common sense and forward thinking would win out and we did not need to voice our opinion LOUDER AND CLEARER. In hindsight, we needed to be out there also protesting. We needed to get together here days before the vote and show our support for civil unions. I am afraid the hoopla against was louder and forefront and was much greater than the support for change.

Next time, and there will be a next time, count me in on the inter-island flight to Honolulu to support change.

[StillHope]

quote:

---

Originally posted by David M

... Instead of redefining marriage, maybe a new word? ...
Garriage (garry, garried, etc) for same gender pairing.
Same rights, kinda like using male/female, equal but more defining.
....

---

I have an amendment # 2 :

Carridge - both type of couples with kids.

[lostboystoy]

Well I think I have sat back being idle and silent to see what unfolds here, Being a gay man in a long-term-relationship.

I have learned to choose my battles a little more carefully than in my youth.

For all of you that are hung up on the word marriage (get over it)

I mean really, for a bunch so called christians who in only GODS eye can be married to one another, I mean really you guys cant even stay married, But it is ok for you to twist Gods words around to suite your selfish needs (thats what I call divorce)

where does it say that you can get divorced? was that not a change to the laws? Its ok to change it to suite your needs as long as you are the majority, but if your the minority. Who speaks for you?

its not a states right or federal right It truly is GODS right for each person to be loved. With that LOVE comes some RIGHTS.
You have the right to defend, protect and take care of the ones you love. Current laws do not allow this for gay people.

Their lies the issue

Its all about having the right to protect the one you love from whatever. inluding owning property, bank accounts, medical. Insurance estate planning ect.

Now allot of states still have common law marriage, you dont have to do anything but live together for a period of time. Their are countries that if you walk someone through your village you are automatically married.

Why is it so damn hard for us to get married, but so easy for you to get divorced, kinda disfunctional don't you think?

or do you think you have the market on disfunctional?

If we cant get married then you shouldnt be able to get divorced. hmmm that would go over like a whore in church.....



setting my soul free....

[Jon]

LOL...
yep its about a word... a legal term... if you can change the meaning of it... how about we look at a few others while we are at it.. I will say it again... Change the definition of the term "The People" to mean the government... and go read the Constitution using that definition...

Repeal the marriage laws completely and be done with this issue.


-----------------------------------------------------------
I do not believe that America is better than everybody else...
America "IS" everybody else.
HBAT

[Blakeyboy1]

I'm thinking that since this is a PUNA forum and HB444 is no longer on the table that maybe this topic can simply fade away until it comes around again next time. If not someone might start talking about how two more states in a week legalized gay marriage while all the conservatives were focused on California and Prop 8. If someone were to bring that up then this topic might just go off on some national tangent about gay marriage and have little or nothing to do with Hawaii HB444. Yep it would be bad if someone started that.

-Blake
http://www.theboysgreatescape.blogspot.com/

[Blakeyboy1]

Or maybe it is not such a dead subject yet after all. I ran across the article below which proposes to leave the current legal definition of marriage alone and propose civil unions for gay and heterosexual couples... How about that Jon?

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/articl.../904070352




-Blake
http://www.theboysgreatescape.blogspot.com/

[kani-lehua]

that's correct. it's not quite a dead issue just yet.

"chaos reigns within.
reflect, repent and reboot.
order shall return."

microsoft error message with haiku poetry